On August 20 2023 09:28 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: It seems much more like a WC3 game than a SC2 game. 4 races, heros, units have more HP and battles last a while and can span across the map, creeps/objectives, mercenaries. Though I love WC3!
I think Stormgate is gonna feel more WC3'ish than Zerospace. The heroes didn't seem too impactful and rather when I think of Wc3 I think of really slow-paced with lots of time to micro a unit before it dies. I think Zerospace in terms of speed is more like 70% Starcraft and 30% wc3 which imo is a more appropriate ratio.
Not sure I'm seeing things wrongly. But the units vs units engagements feel like SC (excluding the heros/abilities), but the unit vs building feels like War3
After watching a few games of this, it honestly made me less interested in the game. The pacing is just off imo, there don't seem to be units which would slow down the gameplay a little (though ofc this is probably mostly related to the economy rates), everyone is just building units which are fairly fast paced with constant action. A lot of action is great, but at least to me this feels like the equivalent of a marvel film where there is no space for downtime of any sorts, which makes everything appear less significant than it probably is (because there is no ebb and flow, no real dramaturgy to it). I also just really don't like the unit appearances, they feel mostly uninspired, as if taken from other games and meshed together. For as much as i like some design decisions on some level (for example making macro easier), there is also some form of void due to it. Eco Harassment in this game is just boring, while i think sc2 might go overboard with some things, there is at least a sense of tension and anticipation to see how well certain harass will do vs how well it is defended. In this game this just doesn't happen, things are too abstract, there is no moment of "oh will he lose 10+ workers", it's "oh one or two of these mineral things will be destroyed, hmm".
So yeah idk, in the abstract i like many things about it, but looking at the gameplay they have presented so far, it all feels very sameish.
On August 25 2023 01:39 Hildegard wrote: For now I'm unable to form an opinion because I found the games hard to follow. The mini map as well as the spectator mod are not optimized, yet.
That plays into it for sure, but imo it's hard to follow mostly because of a lack of real identity in these factions AND units (so many units look very sameish + merc units being used by anyone just removes a lot of faction identity. Scarlett playing the plant faction while driving around these cars, sorry but that's just unappealing, it doesn't fit together; much of this is down to arguably generic and uninspired unit aesthetics though). Plus the pacing of the game is weird, it seems like you really wanna macro up to like 3 bases instantly, and then you just pump a lot of units, trading them all over the place with other units / hero abilities and there really isn't anything else going on outside of that. I am not sure if this is mostly down to people not having figured out other approaches, but there is no real interesting harass going i'd say, there are basically no flying units seemingly which could add some new avenues for gameplay, it doesn't seem like there are any strong defensive units which can slow the game down a litte, so far the gameplay i have seen is action action action with no real sense for 'pacing'.
When i say pacing here i really mean a sense of structure, with different 'sections' which feel differently from each other, tools which allow each game to feel very differently too depending on what one goes for. Now maybe this game allows that, but from what i have seen (about 6ish games) they felt very similar to each other, both in how they generally played out and interactions between the races (this could be down to the lack of identity).
Idk, if i was very harsh i'd say that this game feels more like a mod to me tbh, which isn't that exciting.
On August 25 2023 01:39 Hildegard wrote: For now I'm unable to form an opinion because I found the games hard to follow. The mini map as well as the spectator mod are not optimized, yet.
That plays into it for sure, but imo it's hard to follow mostly because of a lack of real identity in these factions AND units (so many units look very sameish + merc units being used by anyone just removes a lot of faction identity. Scarlett playing the plant faction while driving around these cars, sorry but that's just unappealing, it doesn't fit together; much of this is down to arguably generic and uninspired unit aesthetics though). Plus the pacing of the game is weird, it seems like you really wanna macro up to like 3 bases instantly, and then you just pump a lot of units, trading them all over the place with other units / hero abilities and there really isn't anything else going on outside of that. I am not sure if this is mostly down to people not having figured out other approaches, but there is no real interesting harass going i'd say, there are basically no flying units seemingly which could add some new avenues for gameplay, it doesn't seem like there are any strong defensive units which can slow the game down a litte, so far the gameplay i have seen is action action action with no real sense for 'pacing'.
When i say pacing here i really mean a sense of structure, with different 'sections' which feel differently from each other, tools which allow each game to feel very differently too depending on what one goes for. Now maybe this game allows that, but from what i have seen (about 6ish games) they felt very similar to each other, both in how they generally played out and interactions between the races (this could be down to the lack of identity).
Idk, if i was very harsh i'd say that this game feels more like a mod to me tbh, which isn't that exciting.
The cars for the plant faction truly felt weird. Regarding faction identity, asymmetric design without (or few) hard counters and without a dominating best strategy seems incredibly hard to achieve. They probably fell into the same trap like many before them and published something that looks kind of okay for marketing reasons. But I think to stand out and actually hype people a (RTS) game needs to be exceptional.
However, if this game has enough time I think it might get there, especially with the feedback from professional players they now get. But if this is close to the final product, then absolutely yes, this game will not work.
I think it wouldn't be so jarring if those cars moved on tracks instead of wheels and had skins matching the faction they're supporting, e.g. green camo for the plant race.
On August 24 2023 22:37 The_Red_Viper wrote: After watching a few games of this, it honestly made me less interested in the game. The pacing is just off imo, there don't seem to be units which would slow down the gameplay a little (though ofc this is probably mostly related to the economy rates), everyone is just building units which are fairly fast paced with constant action. A lot of action is great, but at least to me this feels like the equivalent of a marvel film where there is no space for downtime of any sorts, which makes everything appear less significant than it probably is (because there is no ebb and flow, no real dramaturgy to it). I also just really don't like the unit appearances, they feel mostly uninspired, as if taken from other games and meshed together. For as much as i like some design decisions on some level (for example making macro easier), there is also some form of void due to it. Eco Harassment in this game is just boring, while i think sc2 might go overboard with some things, there is at least a sense of tension and anticipation to see how well certain harass will do vs how well it is defended. In this game this just doesn't happen, things are too abstract, there is no moment of "oh will he lose 10+ workers", it's "oh one or two of these mineral things will be destroyed, hmm".
So yeah idk, in the abstract i like many things about it, but looking at the gameplay they have presented so far, it all feels very sameish.
There has to be some positional strong units in the game (units that are cost effective against any number of opposing forces in certain positions). Without that I agree it's gonna be repetitive quite fast.
I noticed the same thing as you on the worker harassment thing as I was watching some more gameplay. The little we saw of harassment in this game was fairly boring. Economy harassment generally adds an interesting element to starcraft and at least some variety.
I worry that Zerospace has the wrong focus when it comes to adding variety. They believe that variety can come from combining mercs with different heroes. However, that seems to be "micro"-variety as opposed to playstyle variety. By playstyle variety I am thinking defensive vs harass vs aggressive.
If everything is similarly mobile and cost efficiency only comes down to micro, it becomes dull quite quickly.
To me it looked like they intentionally reduced the importance of worker harass. The "oooh!" moments are supposed to come from landing skillshots in skirmishes near economically important areas of the map. Something like teamfights near map objectives in MOBAs, where your goal is to get stuff that will make you slightly stronger in the future.
Mobas have uhhh positional variety too where some unit compositions are good in face to face battles while others are focused on outmaneuvering your opponents and striking where they're weak.
I'm not sure it's what I want to see in RTS but it's not like they're strictly dumbing the gameplay down. They're putting emphasis on different things.
On August 25 2023 20:17 Sent. wrote: To me it looked like they intentionally reduced the importance of worker harass. The "oooh!" moments are supposed to come from landing skillshots in skirmishes near economically important areas of the map. Something like teamfights near map objectives in MOBAs, where your goal is to get stuff that will make you slightly stronger in the future.
Mobas have uhhh positional variety too where some unit compositions are good in face to face battles while others are focused on outmaneuvering your opponents and striking where they're weak.
I'm not sure it's what I want to see in RTS but it's not like they're strictly dumbing the gameplay down. They're putting emphasis on different things.
No question that overpowering harass options in Sc2 became a bandaid fix to encourage multitasking and action. A more sound game encourages actual engagements. But I still think harass is fun and is supplementary to the core gameplay.
A big problem of mine is also that i simply don't see a lot of interesting micro in the game. For as much focus as there is on unit interactions in zerospace (which i actually like, i have argued for allocating the attention towards pvp interactions a lot), what i actually see of it looks pretty bland. The abilities don't pop enough to make it exciting and there seems to be a big focus on abilities to begin with, as i've not seen a lot of variety of micro outside of that tbh. Surrounds / body blocking doesn't seem to be what they are going for at all, i've not seen any dropship kind of micro, i've not seen unit interactions in this game which felt interesting to me yet to say it bluntly. I will once again stress that i think a big part of that could be the unit aesthetics and animations, as changing that could make the same interactions feel more satisfying without a doubt, but i don't think it is only that either.
edit: Here is catz casting a bo3 between two devs, and yeah idk, doesn't seem inspiring to me. Just cannot connect to the lack (imo) of pace / rhythm in regards to the gameplay. Things happen, but nothing feels significant or exciting.
> Here is catz casting a bo3 between two devs, and yeah idk, doesn't seem inspiring to me. Just cannot connect to the lack (imo) of pace / rhythm in regards to the gameplay. Things happen, but nothing feels significant or exciting.
How good were the devs? Looked like diamond level to me with very sluggish reactions. I also think micro interactions can be tweaked/refined over time. Adding dropship micro later on should be straight-forward.
I am much more worried about the gameplay primarily being balls of army moving around. I think that's much harder to properly address down the road.
You can't tell how good they are from those games. Harstem's play in his own video about Zerospace was sloppy too and he's a sc2 pro. PiG uploaded a game between Scarlett and GiantGrantGames and she did show some nice micro micro but if I didn't know it was her it might as well be nice diamond player micro.
On August 25 2023 20:17 Sent. wrote: To me it looked like they intentionally reduced the importance of worker harass. The "oooh!" moments are supposed to come from landing skillshots in skirmishes near economically important areas of the map. Something like teamfights near map objectives in MOBAs, where your goal is to get stuff that will make you slightly stronger in the future.
Mobas have uhhh positional variety too where some unit compositions are good in face to face battles while others are focused on outmaneuvering your opponents and striking where they're weak.
I'm not sure it's what I want to see in RTS but it's not like they're strictly dumbing the gameplay down. They're putting emphasis on different things.
No question that overpowering harass options in Sc2 became a bandaid fix to encourage multitasking and action. A more sound game encourages actual engagements. But I still think harass is fun and is supplementary to the core gameplay.
Worker harass should be done by sending in a small force, a dropship or a burrower/nydus type of mechanic that delivers normal units inside the enemy base. Not specialized anti-worker units that can decimate a mineral line in 2 seconds when you're not looking. One of the biggest reasons I quit Starcraft 2 was because of ridiculous, unfun units such as Oracles, Blue Flame Hellbats and Vipers being added into the game.
> Here is catz casting a bo3 between two devs, and yeah idk, doesn't seem inspiring to me. Just cannot connect to the lack (imo) of pace / rhythm in regards to the gameplay. Things happen, but nothing feels significant or exciting.
How good were the devs? Looked like diamond level to me with very sluggish reactions. Not sure average Sc2 game would display a lot more micro. I also think micro interactions can be tweaked/refined over time.
I am much more worried about the gameplay primarily being balls of army moving around. I think that's much harder to properly address down the road.
That's just one example, there were also games being played by scarlett and catz, which ofc looked a little more higher quality because the players are better, but i've not seen anything interesting there either. I just posted this one because i think most people wouldn't have seen it.
Well i think these things are all connected tbh, it's very difficult to try and isolate say the big clumping from uninteresting unit interactions to micro potential and even as i said, how it is presented (unit aesthetics and animation design) right now as one really hasn't enough experience with it. But just from a spectator pov, it feels fairly uninteresting to me, and i think all of these things play some role in that.
On August 25 2023 20:17 Sent. wrote: To me it looked like they intentionally reduced the importance of worker harass. The "oooh!" moments are supposed to come from landing skillshots in skirmishes near economically important areas of the map. Something like teamfights near map objectives in MOBAs, where your goal is to get stuff that will make you slightly stronger in the future.
Mobas have uhhh positional variety too where some unit compositions are good in face to face battles while others are focused on outmaneuvering your opponents and striking where they're weak.
I'm not sure it's what I want to see in RTS but it's not like they're strictly dumbing the gameplay down. They're putting emphasis on different things.
No question that overpowering harass options in Sc2 became a bandaid fix to encourage multitasking and action. A more sound game encourages actual engagements. But I still think harass is fun and is supplementary to the core gameplay.
Worker harass should be done by sending in a small force, a dropship or a burrower/nydus type of mechanic that delivers normal units inside the enemy base. Not specialized anti-worker units that can decimate a mineral line in 2 seconds when you're not looking. One of the biggest reasons I quit Starcraft 2 was because of ridiculous, unfun units such as Oracles, Blue Flame Hellbats and Vipers being added into the game.
Idk, typically there is overlap. Are mutalisks harass units? For sure, but you also could use them in engagements (the more mutas got cycled out in tvz the less interesting the matchup became imo). In bw in particular i think the micro potential of them was fantastic, though there they really were more of a harass unit tbh, at least in zvt. I also think the current state of the oracle is quite fun, a good micro player's usage of it looks quite different from people who aren't able to move it as smoothly, and there is some potential for other usage too with its spells. Where i generally agree is that a lot of the units seem to be a little too strong for casual play in particular when it comes to the ability to kill workers fast, ideally that would be toned down a little (though it's also a problem of sc2 pacing in general), but i don't think that having a general strength in harass is a problem per se. It's more a balancing thing than anything else imo.
On August 25 2023 20:17 Sent. wrote: To me it looked like they intentionally reduced the importance of worker harass. The "oooh!" moments are supposed to come from landing skillshots in skirmishes near economically important areas of the map. Something like teamfights near map objectives in MOBAs, where your goal is to get stuff that will make you slightly stronger in the future.
Mobas have uhhh positional variety too where some unit compositions are good in face to face battles while others are focused on outmaneuvering your opponents and striking where they're weak.
I'm not sure it's what I want to see in RTS but it's not like they're strictly dumbing the gameplay down. They're putting emphasis on different things.
No question that overpowering harass options in Sc2 became a bandaid fix to encourage multitasking and action. A more sound game encourages actual engagements. But I still think harass is fun and is supplementary to the core gameplay.
Worker harass should be done by sending in a small force, a dropship or a burrower/nydus type of mechanic that delivers normal units inside the enemy base. Not specialized anti-worker units that can decimate a mineral line in 2 seconds when you're not looking. One of the biggest reasons I quit Starcraft 2 was because of ridiculous, unfun units such as Oracles, Blue Flame Hellbats and Vipers being added into the game.
Surprised you didn't mention Widow Mine. Widow mine harassment is the most unfun thing to play against. Look away for 2 seconds and all your workers are gone.
Most harass in Sc2 feels better when players are on multiple bases with 80+ workers. In these situations harass isn't usually game-ending.
In fact, the whole game in Sc2 feels better when economy is much stronger for both players as they have an easier time replehensing their armies. I wish RTS game devs dared to be truly innovative and let players start the game with a reasonably strong econ because early gameplay can be way too volatile (and unskillful in terms of rewarding mechanics).
Well i think these things are all connected tbh, it's very difficult to try and isolate say the big clumping from uninteresting unit interactions to micro potential and even as i said, how it is presented (unit aesthetics and animation design) right now as one really hasn't enough experience with it. But just from a spectator pov, it feels fairly uninteresting to me, and i think all of these things play some role in that.
In my ideal game, army sizes are larger, map is large, players work to secure and defend certain terroritories around the map using defensive/positional units + static defense. While simultaneously fighting on other parts of map to secure new areas. That type of gameplay can only work if it's possible for a few units/static defense to cost effectively defend against a much larger army.
If positional units are not cost effective in small numbers or don't exist, the only way you encourage multitasking is through overpowering harass-options in Sc2. I generally am in favor of overpowered medivacs and Warp Prism, but I want that to coexist along side units that can do well in small numbers (but that tends to be immobile).
ZeroSpace appears to have neither atm. Dropships/Banshees/Muta-type of units should be somewhat easy to add in/integrate into any type of RTS game if the devs want more harass.
However, getting the whole type of positional units right is much harder.
To improve how micro feels and look they can work on aesthetics, skill-shots, exactly how much damage they deals and ideal reaction time without adding any more multitasking. So I think micro and multitasking are somewhat separate problems. The latter being harder to fix (aside from overpowering harass-options).
One of the things that stuck me when watching sample game is how weird these wheeled vehicles behave (unrealistic, really) and was wondering why no RTS incorporates different speeds for units on different surface types, which would actually make the decision of walker vs wheeled vs tracked more interesting. Then again maybe RTS can't possible contain such mechanic.
On August 28 2023 03:59 nimdil wrote: One of the things that stuck me when watching sample game is how weird these wheeled vehicles behave (unrealistic, really) and was wondering why no RTS incorporates different speeds for units on different surface types, which would actually make the decision of walker vs wheeled vs tracked more interesting. Then again maybe RTS can't possible contain such mechanic.
EPT
